7
And lest the papalists try to escape by means of the objection that they do not
ascribe any power to the matter or form of the statues, they do not worship and
honor the devil, as the heathen do, but in the images honor either God Himself
or the saints who live with God and who live merited well of the church, so
that the honor shown the images is referred back to the prototype, that is, to
those who are signified and represented through the images or statues, we shall
show clearly from the histories of the heathen that they themselves referred
the honors and worship which they showed to statues or pictures, not
principally to the material or form of the statues, but either to the highest
God or to those whose spirit they thought lived with God and who could help
mortals much with God as mediators or intercessors, as those who in life had
merited well of the human race. . . . .the superstition of the common people
among the heathen, even as among the papalists, was more grossly attached to
the statues, which knowledgeable persons disguised rather than approved. Thus
according to Augustine, De civitate Dei, Bk. 4, ch. 27, the high priest
Scaevola considers it expedient that the cities should be deceived in the
matter of religion. And Varro says, ch. 31, that many things are true which are
not only not useful for the common people to know, but even if they are false,
it is expedient that the people should think otherwise, and that for this
reason the Greeks had hidden the mysteries behind silence and walls. And
Seneca, Bk. 6, ch. 10, ridicules the superstition of the common people thus:
“They consecrate the holy, immortal, inviolable gods in a most lowly and
immovable matter, they put on them the qualities of men, of wild animals, and
of fish; some indeed they give bodies differing according to sex and call them
deities. If these should suddenly receive life and one would meet them, they
would be considered monsters.” And afterward he says: “A wise man will observe
all these things as matters commanded by law, but not as pleasing to the gods.”
Likewise: “All this ignoble crowd of gods, which long superstition during a
long time gathered together, she shall adore in such a way that we remember
that their worship belongs more to custom than to the thing itself.”
The wise among the heathen did not
think that the gods per se had such forms as were indicated by the statues, but
added skillful interpretations, as Augustine says, Epistle 49. Such
interpretations are also found with Eusebius, De praeparat., Bks. 3 and
4, and with others, namely that they had at one time appeared to men in forms
of this kind, or that the invisible nature or peculiarity of the gods might in
this way be placed before the eyes, or that through forms of this kind the
merits and devices with which they at one time helped the human race, or the
benefits to be asked of them, might be signified. Arnobius writes, Bk. 6, that
the heathen taught that statues are to be adored, not because brass, gold,
silver, and similar materials of statues are gods, but because the presence of
the gods, who are otherwise invisible, can be shown through the images, and
because either gods or divine virtues dwell in the, or because through them the
invisible gods are honored and worshiped, because the images are dedicated to
them. He writes likewise that the heathen invoked in temples in front of
statues than then they were adored under the bare heavens and the vault of the
sky.
According to Athanasius, in his
oration Contra idola, the philosophers say that the statues are not to
be considered gods, but likenesses of the gods, that the gods might, under
these images, answer and reveal themselves, seeing that they are otherwise
invisible and cannot be known in any other way. Others, philosophizing more
sharply, say that these things were instituted in order that the gods might be
invoked through them, and that the coming of angels and other powers might be
brought about for the conferring of benefits. They add that it is for the
rudiments of learning, that men may thus learn to acknowledge the invisible
God. So says Athanasius.
Eusebius, De praeparat.,
Bk. 3, quotes form Porphyry that the more unlearned regard only the wood and
stone in the statues, but that the wise wanted to signify or reveal God and the
powers of God to our sense through images which are familiar to us, picturing
or expressing the invisible things of God through visible pictures for those who are
accustomed to read or father knowledge or instruction about the gods from
images as though from books. And in Bk. 4 he treats and refutes the argument of
the heathen by which they defend and strengthen the cult of idols on the basis
of miracles of healing and from punishments, proved b the experience for
despisers of idols. And according to Augustine, De civitate Dei, Bk. 7,
ch. 5, Varro says: “As through the human body the soul which is in the body is
known, so through images, which have human form, the immortal spirits of the
gods are signified,” etc.
Although by interpretations of
this kind the wise among the heathen embroidered the superstitions of the
common people, it nevertheless remained true what Augustine writes, Epistle 49:
“Does anyone doubt that idols lack all sensation? Nevertheless, when they are
placed in such locations at an honorable height, in order that they may be
looked upon by those who pray and offer sacrifice, they affect the weak minds
by the very resemblance of living members and senses, so that they appear to
live and breathe, although they are without feeling and lifeless-especially
when there is added the veneration of the multitude by which so great a worship
of God is devoted to them. Likewise, then people address prayers to them as
being present, or pay vows, they are altogether affected in such a way that
they do not dare to think that they lack sensation.”
These things which we have noted
until now about the images of the heathen will have their use later, when we come to the papalist veneration of
images, for a similar cult of statues is also embroidered with similar
interpretations among the papalists. (Martin Chemnitz, Examination of the
Council of Trent, 4 vols. [trans. Fred Kramer; St. Louis, Miss.: Concordia
Publishing House, 2021], 4:64-66)
. . . whenever in true histories
there are found any more in churchly assemblies and in the exercise of divine
worship, no mention is made of images, likenesses, and statues being used,
either of God or of the saints. But since the idolatry of the heathen consisted
in the worship and adoration of images, likenesses, and statues, which worship
they nevertheless referred to what was typified by the images, as we have
shown, the Christians simply abhorred images and condemned as heretics those
who wanted to worship and adore either the statues of others or also Christ
Himself in statues or through images.
Theodoret, Haeret. fab. comp.,
Bk. 1, and Augustine, De haeresibus, write that Simon Magus taught his
followers that his own and his harlot Selene’s image should be worshiped and
adored; it is also written that his disciples burned incense to it. Irenaeus
writes, Bk. 1, ch. 23, that the followers of Basilides used images and
invocations. And in ch. 24 he relates that the Carpocratians, who called
themselves Gnostics, had certain images, either depicted in colors, or made of
another material, and said that it was the form of Christ, made by Pilate at
the time when Christ was with men. These images, he says, they set up together
with images of the philosophers of the world, crowned them, and made other
observances around them the way the heathen do.
Epiphanius, Tom. 2, Bk. 1,
Heresy 27, says that Carpocrates secretly made images of Christ, of Paul, etc.,
and burned incense to them and adored them. Augustine, De haeresibus,
writes that Marcellina, a member of the sect of Carpocrates, worshiped images
of Jesus and Paul, of Homer and Pythagoras, adoring them and offering incense.
3
Among the difference between the worship of the heathen and that of the
Christians this was not the smallest one, that the heathen worshiped their gods
in likenesses, through images, and before statues, while the Christians
worshiped and adored the true God without images, “in spirit and truth” [John
4:24], according to the prescription of the Word. And in order to cut off every
occasion for idolatry, in order that the Christian religion might have no
affinity with paganism, which consisted in the worship of images, and lest the
seeds of heathen superstition should through the occasion of images either
creep into the church or remain in the minds of converts, the primitive church
did not want to receive even the images of Christ and of the saints into the
places of worship. And among the points of accusation the heathen threw also
this up to the Christians, that they had a religion without images.
Clement of Alexandria, who lived
around A.D. 200, says, Stromat., Bk. 6: “We have not a single image in
the world, because among things that are born noting is able to reflect the
image of God.” And in the Paraeneticum he writes: “We are openly
forbidden to exercise the deceitful art, for it is written: ‘You shall not make
the likeness of anything.,’” etc. Likewise: “We have no perceivable image of
tangible matter, btu one which is perceived by the mind for God, who along is
the true God, is perceived by the intellect, not by the senses.”
Also in the books Recognitiones,
which are ascribed, although incorrectly to Clement of Rome, there is, Bk. 5, a
general disputation against images, and the chief argument of the heathen, with
which also the papalists cloak the worship of their images, is refuted. He
says: “The serpent is accustomed to say words of this kind through the heathen:
‘We adore visible images in honor of the invisible God.’” Clement answers:
“This is most certainly false.” Yet he does not substitute other images, either
painted or fabricated, either of Christ or of saints, but says: “if you truly wanted
to worship the image of God you would, by doing good to man, worship the true
image of God in him. If therefore you truly want to honor the image of God in
him. If therefore you truly want to honor the image of God, we shall show you
what is true, that you should do good to man, who is made in the image of God.
For these things result in honor of God’s image to such an extent that anyone
who does not do them is considered to have offered an insult to the divine
image. What honor of God is it, therefore, to run to forms of stone and wood, to
empty and lifeless figures, honoring them as deities, and to despite man, who
is the true image of God?” So says this Clement. (Martin Chemnitz, Examination
of the Council of Trent, 4 vols. [trans. Fred Kramer; St. Louis, Miss.:
Concordia Publishing House, 2021], 4:83-84)
8
Only and solely in Tertullian, who flourished around A.D. 200, I noticed that
the story of the Shepherd calling and seeking the straying sheep was in some
places depicted and inscribed on the sacred chalices. For when arguing in the
book, De pudicitia, according to the teachings of Montanus, that the
parable in Luke 15:3-7 must be understood, not of lapsed Christians but of
heathen who have not yet been converted, he says: “Let the very pictures on
your chalices come forward, if at least in these the interpretation of this
sheep will shine forth clearly, whether it aims at the restitution of a
Christian or of a heathen sinner.” Thus says Tertullian. But this picture was
not put forth for worship; and how hostile the other writers of those times
were toward images we have already shown. (Martin Chemnitz, Examination of
the Council of Trent, 4 vols. [trans. Fred Kramer; St. Louis, Miss.:
Concordia Publishing House, 2021], 4:89)
